AzTrials
AzTrials

Hearing Loss, ConductiveNCT01699620

Comparative Study of Two Surgical Techniques for Soft Tissue Healing and Implant Stability of Cochlear BI300 Implants.

A study testing BAHA implant insertion in people with Hearing Loss, Conductive, run by Aarhus University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The study compares two different operative techniques for placement of the Cochlear Bi300 implant to be used for bone anchored hearing aid. The operative techniques to be compared are Dermatome technique with soft tissue reduction Linear incision with minimal or no soft tissue reduction The hypothesis is that the… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Hearing Loss, Conductive
What is being tested?
BAHA implant insertion
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
49 participants
Where
1 siteDenmark
Study dates
Aug 2012to Jun 2014
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Hearing loss suitable for bone anchored hearing aid
  • Capable of maintaining sufficient hygiene around the implant.

Who cannot join

  • Previous radiotherapy to the operation area
  • Diabetes
  • Skin disease in the operation area
  • Any relevant medical history or current disease/treatment/medication that may affect bone or skin quality in the implant area.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Denmark1 site
  • Aarhus University Hospital, ENT-department

    Aarhus, 8000

Other trials in Denmark

About this study

Official title: Evaluation of Soft Tissue Healing and Implant Stability of Cochlear Baha BI300 Implants Loaded From 2 Weeks Post-surgery: a Comparison Between Two Surgical Techniques.

The study compares two different operative techniques for placement of the Cochlear Bi300 implant to be used for bone anchored hearing aid. The operative techniques to be compared are

  • Dermatome technique with soft tissue reduction
  • Linear incision with minimal or no soft tissue reduction
Read more

The hypothesis is that the operative techniques are comparable with regard to implant stability, soft tissue healing and loss of sensibility around the implant.

To evaluate the evolution of implant stability during the early healing period after implantation, which is the most critical period for osseointegrated implants, in particular when early loading protocols are used.

To compare soft tissue healing around Baha implants placed according to the recommended surgical technique with skin transplant and Baha implants without performing skin reduction.

To compare the loss of sensibility of the skin around the Baha implant (some loss of cutaneous sensibility nerves in the transplant procedure) between the two surgical procedures.

While the study focuses on the early healing period (3 months), long-term safety data will also be collected after 6 months and 1-year.

The study will also evaluate the change in health status produced by the surgical intervention.

Read the detailed description
  1. BACKGROUND Implant stability Until recently, the implants used in Baha surgery have exclusively been standard Brånemark type of titanium implants with an as-machined surface finish. The recommended procedure for Baha implantation with the machined titanium implants uses a 12-week healing period before loading the implant with a sound processor, in order to allow sufficient time for the implant to become integrated in the bone. The new Cochlear Baha BI300 Series implant has been designed to improve implant stability at placement and over time, thus making it possible to reduce the time to sound processor fitting. The implant features a wider diameter compared to the previous generation Baha implant, small-sized threads at the cylindrical portion of the implant underneath the flange, and a roughened implant surface. Six-month data from a multi-centre clinical investigation comparing the new implant with the previous generation Baha implant using a 6-week loading protocol, shows significantly higher Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values (measured by resonance frequency analysis) for the new implant at each time point, and no reduction in stability after loading.1 The data from the study suggest that the implant stability achieved 6 weeks after implantation is sufficient to support the sound processor. The data also suggest that a further reduction of the time to sound processor fitting may be possible, provided favourable bone conditions at the implant site and provided satisfactory soft tissue status at the time of loading. Hence, a clinical investigation with implant loading 21 days post-surgery was initiated by the team in Nijmegen, and 6-month data from the investigation confirm that it is safe to attach the sound processor after 3 weeks.2 Early results from two other studies using loading times of 4 weeks3 and 2 weeks4, respectively, have also been presented and show good outcomes. All studies have been performed on patients with good bone quality. Soft tissue management The recommended procedure for Baha implantation advocates a hair free transplant measuring 25 x 25 mm placed direct on the periosteum. The purpose is to obtain an immobile skin, hence reducing the risk of adverse skin reactions in the area. Since there is no or only weak adherence between the titanium abutment and surrounding soft tissue it is anticipated that, if no skin reduction is performed, epidermal downgrowth and pocket formation may occur over time, increasing the risk for infection in the implant area. The current surgical procedure, with skin transplant, has been used for three decades and proven safe; however, skin complications still occur and account for the majority of reported complications with Baha implants. Some surgeons have hypothesised that equally good or better results may be achieved if the soft tissue is left intact. However, the clinical evidence still remains scarce and a systematic follow-up is lacking. To the investigators knowledge, the only publication specifically focusing on the alternative surgical technique without soft tissue thinning is a limited study by Dr. Hultcrantz comparing outcomes in seven patients undergoing Baha surgery with the traditional surgical technique (with skin thinning) and seven patients with the alternative technique (without skin thinning).5 The outcomes of the study are promising, but more clinical data is necessary to establish whether the surgical technique is safe and efficacious.
  2. OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evolution of implant stability during the early healing period after implantation, which is the most critical period for osseointegrated implants, in particular when early loading protocols are used.

To compare soft tissue healing around Baha implants placed according to the recommended surgical technique with skin transplant and Baha implants without performing skin reduction.

To compare the loss of sensibility of the skin around the Baha implant (some loss of cutaneous sensibility nerves in the transplant procedure) between the two surgical procedures.

While the study focuses on the early healing period (3 months), long-term safety data will also be collected after 6 months and 1-year.

The study will also evaluate the change in health status produced by the surgical intervention.

  1. IMPLANT DEVICE

The following CE marked implant with pre-mounted abutment shall be used (MDD Class IIb medical devices, manufacturer: Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions AB, Mölnlycke, Sweden):

  • Cochlear Baha BIA300 Implant 4 mm with Abutment 9 mm (Article # 92346)

Note: The 9 mm abutment will be used in both treatment groups (with and without skin transplant) in order to be able to compare results from resonance frequency analyses (implant stability) during the early healing period. When appropriate, the patients with skin reduction will have the 9 mm abutment exchanged to a 6 mm abutments (Article # 92130) after 3-month data has been collected. No further surgery is needed in order to exchange the 9 mm abutment to 6 mm abutment.

  1. TREATMENT

Implantation and use of the Baha system (hearing device/implant system). The implants shall be placed according to the procedure for FAST (one-stage) surgery.

All patients will receive treatment, thus no placebo control group is used.

  1. METHOD

This evaluation will be performed at one site. Implants will be placed in a one-stage surgical procedure. Sound processor fitting will be performed 2 weeks after implant installation, or at the discretion of the investigator. The decision to load an implant will be based on assessment of implant stability and status of the soft tissue. Patients who are evaluated as not ready to be loaded 2 weeks after surgery will be loaded as soon as the healing is sufficient.

Patients included in the study will be randomised into two different treatment groups where the patients in one group will have soft tissue removed and split skin (harvested with dermatome) will be used to cover the periosteum around the abutment as per the recommended procedure by the manufacturer, and the patients in the other group will not have any soft tissue removed (a linear incision technique will be used). If the subcutaneous tissue is of a thickness so that it is not possible to use a 9 mm abutment, minimal removal of the subcutaneous tissue superficial of the fascia will be performed.

The risks with this treatment are the same for the two treatment groups and are: bleeding per- and postoperatively, wound infection and damage to surrounding tissues including sensory nerves to the scalp and loss of the implant. These risks are well known risks with known treatments. The new surgical procedure does not introduce any new risks.

The change in health status produced by the surgical intervention is evaluated with the Glasgow Benefit Inventory 3 months after surgery.

Being tested
BAHA implant insertion
Keywords
Bone anchored hearing aid, Soft tissue healing, Implant stability, Linear incision, Dermatome technique, Hearing Aids, Implants, Artificial, Surgical Procedures, Operative
Medical subject headings
Hearing Loss, Conductive

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • BAHA implant insertionProcedure or surgery

    Also called Cochlear Bi300

    The intervention is insertion of the Cochlear Bi300 to be used for bone anchored hearing aid.

Study groups in NCT01699620
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
DermatomeExperimentalBAHA implant insertion with Dermatome technique
Receives: Procedure: BAHA implant insertion
Linear incisionExperimentalBAHA implant insertion with linear incision
Receives: Procedure: BAHA implant insertion

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Implant stability, day of surgery

    Implant stability shall be assessed using resonance frequency analysis. The measurement renders Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values from 1 to 100. Two perpendicular measurements shall be performed at each implant. The highest and lowest ISQ value out of three measurements obtained at each time point shall be recorded. Measurements shall be performed at the abutment level, and the Osstell ISQ instrument and SmartPeg Type 55 (Osstell, Gothenburg, Sweden) shall be used.

    Note: If a patient requires a change of abutment height, ISQ values shall be recorded on both abutment heights at the time of abutment change, in order to obtain a reference value for subsequent RFA measurements.

    Measured: Day of surgery

  2. Implant stability, early healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 3 days postoperatively

  3. Implant stability, early healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 7 days postoperatively

  4. Implant stability, early healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 10 days postoperatively

  5. Implant stability, loading of implant

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 14 days postoperatively

  6. Implant stability, middle healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 21 days postoperatively

  7. Implant stability, middle healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 30 days postoperatively

  8. Implant stability, late healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 60 days postoperatively

  9. Implant stability, late healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 180 days postoperatively

  10. Implant stability, late healing phase

    See description for "Implant stability, day of surgery".

    Measured: 1 year postoperatively

Secondary outcomes (9)
  1. Soft tissue status

    The status of the soft tissue around the abutment shall be assessed using the classification proposed by Holgers et al, referred to as Holgers Index. See scale below:

    Grade 0 No irritation. Epidermal debris removed if present. Grade 1 Slight redness. Temporary local treatment. Grade 2 Red and slightly moist tissue. No granulation formation. Local treatment, extra controls.

    Grade 3 Reddish and moist. Sometimes granulation tissue. Revision surgery is indicated.

    Grade 4 Removal of skin-penetrating implant or abutment necessary due to infection.

    Grade R Removal of implant for reasons not related to skin problems.

    Measured: 3 days postoperatively

  2. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively

    Measured: 7 days postoperatively

  3. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 10 days postoperatively

  4. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 14 days postoperatively

  5. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 21 days postoperatively

  6. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 30 days postoperatively

  7. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 60 days postoperatively

  8. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 180 days postoperatively

  9. Soft tissue status

    See "Soft tissue status" - 3 days postoperatively.

    Measured: 1 year postoperatively

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted3 Oct 2012 (estimated)
  2. Study startAug 2012
  3. Primary completionMay 2013
  4. Study completionJun 2014

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
49 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01699620
Sponsor's protocol ID
66.20.19.1.LV
Status last verified
Jan 2015
First submitted
25 Sep 2012
Last updated
15 Jan 2015
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Dun CA, de Wolf MJ, Hol MK, Wigren S, Eeg-Olofsson M, Green K, Karlsmo A, Flynn MC, Stalfors J, Rothera M, Mylanus EA, Cremers CW. Stability, survival, and tolerability of a novel baha implant system: six-month data from a multicenter clinical investigation. Otol Neurotol. 2011 Aug;32(6):1001-7. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182267e9c.

    PubMed 21725257
  • Dun CAJ, Faber HT, Mylanus EA, Cremers CW, Hol MK. Implant stability after earlier loading of the Baha BI300 implant. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium for Bone Conduction Hearing - Craniofacial Osseointegration; 2011 Mar 23-26; Sarasota, USA.

  • McLarnon C, Johnson I, Davison T, Hill J, Henderson B, Leese D, Morley D. Evidence for early loading of Baha BI300 system at four weeks. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium for Bone Conduction Hearing - Craniofacial Osseointegration; 2011 Mar 23-26; Sarasota, USA.

  • Green KM, Exley RP, Bruce IA, Andrew R. First experiences of loading a Baha sound processor at 2 weeks following surgery. Presented at the Third International Symposium for Bone Conduction Hearing - Craniofacial Osseointegration in Sarasota, USA, 23-26 March 2011

  • Hultcrantz M. Outcome of the bone-anchored hearing aid procedure without skin thinning: a prospective clinical trial. Otol Neurotol. 2011 Sep;32(7):1134-9. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31822a1c47.

    PubMed 21817939
  • Holgers KM, Tjellstrom A, Bjursten LM, Erlandsson BE. Soft tissue reactions around percutaneous implants: a clinical study of soft tissue conditions around skin-penetrating titanium implants for bone-anchored hearing aids. Am J Otol. 1988 Jan;9(1):56-9.

    PubMed 3364537
  • Robinson K, Gatehouse S, Browning GG. Measuring patient benefit from otorhinolaryngological surgery and therapy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1996 Jun;105(6):415-22. doi: 10.1177/000348949610500601.

    PubMed 8638891

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing BAHA implant insertion in people with Hearing Loss, Conductive, run by Aarhus University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Jan 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Denmark. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Implant stability, day of surgery (time frame: Day of surgery). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01699620, which also lists 7 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Jan 2015.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in